**ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION AWARENESS AMONG
SCHOOL TEACHERS **

**Vipinder Nagra**

**INTRODUCTION**

The goal of environmental
education is to develop a world population that is aware of and concerned about
the environment and its associated problems and who has the knowledge, skills,
attitudes, motivations and commitment to work individually and collectively
towards solution of current environmental problems and prevention of new ones.
School system provides the largest organized base for environmental education and
action. It offers an effective instrument for embedding in them the desirable
environmental ethics. Teacher is one of the important factors, which is bound
to affect this programme. Teachers can provide a vital link in the delivery of
environmental knowledge, its associated problems and their solutions. Taking
into consideration this situation, the investigator felt a need to conduct a
study to examine whether residential background has any effect on the
environmental education awareness of school teachers along with their level.

**HYPOTHESES**

1. There will be no
significant difference between the environmental education awareness of
schoolteachers in relation to level.

2. There will be no
significant difference between the environmental education awareness of
schoolteachers in relation to residential background.

3. There will be no
significant interaction between the level and residential background upon
environmental education awareness.

**METHOD**

**Sample **

The sample consisted of
3600 school teachers of Punjab, selected using stratified random sampling
technique from the districts of

**Tool **

The study was conducted
with the help of self-made questionnaire. The reliability coefficient of the
questionnaire by test- retest method was +0.99. After standardizing the
tool, the final draft of the questionnaire consisted of 100 multiple-choice
items. Each correct test item was given
a weightage of one mark and each wrong response or omitted item received zero
mark. As there were 100 items, an individual could get a maximum score of 100.

**Statistical Techniques**

The two way (2*2) ANOVA
technique and t- tests were employed for the analysis and interpretation of
data and for testing the hypotheses. Means, standard deviations, maximum
scores, minimum scores, medians were calculated. Scores were arranged into
various quartiles (0-25, 26-50, 51-75, 76-100) to know about the number and
percentage of respondents who have low, moderate, high and very high
environmental education awareness. .

**RESULTS AND DISCUSSION **

The results obtained for
the main effects and interactions of factors were as follows: ANOVA results
showed that the F-value for level of
schoolteachers in the mean environmental education awareness test scores was
15.32, which was statistically significant at both levels (P<.01 and
P<.05). Hence, it was concluded that level of school teachers affect their
environmental education awareness. Further, the mean of elementary school
teachers (64.28) was lower (p<0.01) than that of secondary school teachers
(66.04) showing a difference of 1.76. The
‘t’ value calculated for this group difference was 3.90, which was
significant at 0.01 level. This significant difference showed that secondary
school teachers had a higher level of environmental education awareness than
elementary school teachers. The percentage distribution of the respondent’s
scores in the highest quartile of secondary teachers was 26.8%, which was
higher than that of elementary teachers, which was 22.2%. All these findings
revealed that there exists significant difference between both the levels of
school teachers. Hence, H1 was rejected. The F-value for residential background of schoolteachers
in the mean environmental education awareness test scores was 1.24, which was
statistically significant at both the levels (P<.01 and P<.05). Hence,
residential background of school
teachers does affect their environmental education awareness. It was further
noted that the mean of urban teachers (66.22) was higher than that of rural
teachers (64.1) showing a difference of
2.12. The ‘t’ value
calculated for this group difference was
4.71, which was also significant at 0.01 level. Hence, urban teachers had a
higher level of environmental education awareness than the rural teachers. The
findings of Patel and Patel (1994), Pradhan (1995), Pareek and Sidana (1998)
and Pradhan (2002) also suggested that there exists significant difference in
the environmental awareness level in relation to residential background. Even
the percentage distribution of the respondent’s scores in the highest quartile of urban teachers was
26.8% which was higher than that of rural teachers, which was 22.2%. All these
findings support the assumption that there exists significant difference
between urban and rural school teachers. Hence,
H2 was rejected. The F value for the interaction of variable, level and
the residential background of school teachers (A x B) was 0.54, which was
insignificant at both the levels (P<.01 and P<.05) . This showed that
there does not exists an interaction effect between the variables i.e., the
level of schoolteachers along with residential background. Hence, H3 was
accepted.

**CONCLUSION**

The secondary school
teachers showed significant variation in environmental education awareness than
elementary school teachers. This suggests that level influences the
environmental education awareness of teachers. The urban and rural school
teachers showed significant variation in environmental education awareness
highlighting that residential background affects the environmental education
awareness of the school teachers. There was insignificant interaction between
level and residential background upon environmental education awareness.
However, independently both varied in their results. Teachers should have the
necessary level of environmental education awareness. Pertinent steps have to
be taken to prepare environmentally conscious teachers. More attention should be given for teachers,
teaching at school levels. Environmental education programmes should be
included in both in-service and pre- service
programmes meant for elementary as well as rural teachers.

**REFERENCES**

Nachimuthu, K. &
Vijayakumari, G. (1993) An urgent need for environmental education. *The
Educational Review*

Pareek, M. & Sidana,
A.K. (1998) Environmental awareness among secondary school students. *Educational
Review*

Patel, D.G. and Patel, N.A.
(1994) Environmental awareness of the primary school teachers. *The Progress
of Education* LXVIII, 10-11, 234-236.

Pradhan, G.C. (1995)
Environmental awareness among teacher trainees. *University News* 33, 40,
10-14.

Pradhan, G.C. (2002)
Environmental awareness among secondary school teachers: a study. *The
Educational Review* 45, 2, 25-27.

* *